ReviewNorth American Spine Society journal2026
Intraspinal abnormalities in MRI-evaluated congenital scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence, geographic variation, vertebral anomaly patterns, and Cobb angle.
Review in North American Spine Society journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intraspinal abnormalities are common in congenital scoliosis, yet estimates and associations with vertebral anomaly patterns and curve severity remain inconsistent. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of intraspinal abnormalities in congenital scoliosis patients and evaluate relationships with sex, geographic region, vertebral anomaly type, and Cobb angle. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane were searched through January 1, 2026. Observational studies of congenital scoliosis patients who underwent MRI and reported intraspinal abnormalities were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. Methodological quality was assessed using MINORS. (PROSPERO: CRD420251276010). Results: Eighteen studies reporting 4,463 patients were included; 1,474 had intraspinal abnormalities. Overall quality was moderate. Pooled prevalence was 35% (95% CI: 29%-40%), with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 91.1%) and a prediction interval of 16%-60%. Diastematomyelia was most frequent, followed by syringomyelia and tethered cord. Within each vertebral anomaly subgroup, pooled prevalence was 26% for failure of formation, 47% for failure of segmentation, and 40% for mixed defects. In unadjusted study-level comparisons, intraspinal abnormalities were associated with higher odds of failure of segmentation (odds ratio: 1.89 [95% CI: 1.39-2.56]) and mixed abnormalities (1.43 [1.09-1.88]). Cobb angle was higher in patients with intraspinal abnormalities than in those without, but the difference was not statistically significant (mean difference: 3.30° [95% CI: -1.53 to 8.13]; p = .1805). Conclusions: Intraspinal abnormalities affect one-third of congenital scoliosis patients. Failure of segmentation and mixed vertebral anomalies may identify higher-risk subgroups, supporting MRI-based evaluation for diagnosis and surgical planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.